Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: SVM: Analyze is_guest_mode() in svm_vcpu_run()
To:     Krish Sadhukhan <krish.sadhukhan@oracle.com>,
        Wanpeng Li <kernellwp@gmail.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        kvm@vger.kernel.org
Cc:     Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>,
        Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
        Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>,
        Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>,
        Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>
References: <1600066548-4343-1-git-send-email-wanpengli@tencent.com>
 <b39b1599-9e1e-8ef6-1b97-a4910d9c3784@oracle.com>
From:   Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <91baab6a-3007-655a-5c59-6425473d2e33@redhat.com>
Date:   Tue, 22 Sep 2020 15:43:35 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/68.11.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <b39b1599-9e1e-8ef6-1b97-a4910d9c3784@oracle.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk

On 14/09/20 22:43, Krish Sadhukhan wrote:
>>
> 
> Not related to your changes, but should we get rid of the variable
> 'exit_fastpath' and just do,
> 
>         return svm_exit_handler_fastpath(vcpu);
> 
> It seems the variable isn't used anywhere else and svm_vcpu_run()
> doesn't return from anywhere else either.

Yes (also because vmx will do the same once we can push
EXIT_FASTPATH_REENTER_GUEST handling up to vcpu_enter_guest)...

> Also, svm_exit_handlers_fastpath() doesn't have any other caller. 
> Should we get rid of it as well ?

... and no, because svm_vcpu_run is a very large function and therefore
it's better to keep its flow streamlined.

Paolo